Subject:
|
Re: Family values?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 Jan 2001 21:18:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
224 times
|
| |
|
|
Note the one father did NOT want to disconnect from the child, he simply wanted
the biological father to rightly shoulder the financial burden.
That being said, I DO agree with something else in the article - if the "fathers"
DO get out of support, there should be the possibility of also losing visitation
rights. The "fathers" would have to balance the two.
Maggie Cambron wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> > Blood boiling because the "fathers" rightly think they owe nothing, or that
> > the courts still force them to pay?
>
> Or blood boiling because these fathers find it so easy to suddenly detach
> themselves from children they've thought of as their own for years with little
> regard for their emotional and financial well-being?
>
> Maggie C.
> >
> >
> > Dave Schuler wrote:
> >
> > > Here's one that's sure to get the blood boiling. Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/01/03/childsupport.civ.ap/index.html
> > >
> > > Dave!
> >
> > --
> > | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp
> > | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
--
| Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Family values?
|
| (...) Or blood boiling because these fathers find it so easy to suddenly detach themselves from children they've thought of as their own for years with little regard for their emotional and financial well-being? Maggie C. (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
